Members of Anonymous' "Antisec" collective struck a Web server of the Federal Trade Commission's Bureau of Consumer Protection early on February 17, hacking into and defacing the sites hosted on it.

"The Bureau of Consumer Protection’s Business Center website and the partnership site NCPW run by the Federal Trade Commission were hacked earlier today," FTC spokesperson Cecelia Prewett said in an official statement sent to Ars. "The FTC takes these malicious acts seriously. The sites have been taken down and will be brought back up when we’re satisfied that any vulnerability has been addressed."

The log of the hack, a cut-and-paste from a shell session on the Red Hat Enterprise Linux server, shows the server's directories, the user account names and encrypted passwords stored in its etc/shadow file, and the MySQL databases running on the server. The contents of two of the tables posted in the log dump include the contents of a table with the account names, e-mail addresses, and hashed passwords of what appears to be the users of the server's installations of Drupal and WordPress.

While the websites belong to the FTC, they weren't running in a government-owned data center. According to the IP address data for the server, it was hosted by Media Temple in Culver City, California, and it appears its sites were set up for the FTC by the public relations firm Fleishman-Hilliard. A spokesperson for Fleishman did not respond to requests for comment. Update: Media Temple CMO Kim Brubeck told Ars that her company was unaware Fleishman had intended to use the uservers in its data center for .gov sites, and that she has requested they remove any additional .gov sites.

Based on the claims of the Anon Antisec member who posted the log of the attack to Pastebin.com, the attack was motivated by the FTC's failure to step in to stop Google's changes in its privacy policy, and by the US government's support of ACTA. In the statement, the Anon threatened that "If ACTA is signed by all participating negotiating countries...We will systematically knock all evil corporations and governments off of our internet."

49 Reader Comments

"the attack was motivated by the FTC's failure to step in to stop Google's changes in its privacy policy"? Really? What, afraid to touch the almighty Saint Google directly? That's some interesting (lack of) convictions...

Yea, I'm still confused over whether the FTC and FBI etc actually give a shit if their public web page gets DDOS'd? Is this somehow pushing policy? I doubt it anon, move on to people who's pages actually effect their operation.

"the attack was motivated by the FTC's failure to step in to stop Google's changes in its privacy policy"? Really? What, afraid to touch the almighty Saint Google directly? That's some interesting (lack of) convictions...

It's possible that Google just has better security - who's to say that Anonymous isn't trying to hack Google's servers right now, and hasn't said anything about it because they haven't succeeded yet?

I don't know what you are getting at. The history is that Google fucked up with Buzz and the FTC investigated them, which resulted in a Consent Agreement saying that they won't do it again. Google introduced a new privacy agreement 3 weeks ago, which is scheduled to come into force in 2 weeks. The FTC received complaints (and a lawsuit from EPIC) that allege that this violates the Consent Agreement. The FTC announced publicly that they are looking into these complaints, and are scheduled to give their response to EPIC today (AFAIK, it hasn't been released yet). Anonymous, upset that the FTC is taking time to actually investigate this rather than go Judge Dredd on Google, throws a hissy fit.

"the attack was motivated by the FTC's failure to step in to stop Google's changes in its privacy policy"? Really? What, afraid to touch the almighty Saint Google directly? That's some interesting (lack of) convictions...

It's possible that Google just has better security - who's to say that Anonymous isn't trying to hack Google's servers right now, and hasn't said anything about it because they haven't succeeded yet?

This registers the same level of stupidity that going after the Marine's defense lawyers smacks of. ACTA already way higher than the FTC and Google's changing the policy. If it's not stupidity, then it's fear. They probably CAN do it, but they aren't willing to face those levels of consequences.

Oh, and the ACTA bit is even more puzzling, as the FTC has nothing to do with it. They weren't involved in negotiating it, they won't be involved in ratifying it, and will not be enforcing it if it is ratified. These actions make about as much sense as taking down the Dept of Agriculture website in protest of ACTA.

While I feel there is a right to protest, what good does it do to take down a site used by citizens to conduct legitimate business?

I'm sure they have a sense that sending a letter to the FTC or standing outside their office won't do anything so they are acting out in the best way that they know with something they think will get their best attention and the media's attention. I mean if you have a complaint about something you're going to have to do a little bit more then say please sir can you stop. Also in this day of age you can't just say excuse me anymore for someone to listen you're going to have to shout and your going to have to act out.

Oh, and the ACTA bit is even more puzzling, as the FTC has nothing to do with it. They weren't involved in negotiating it, they won't be involved in ratifying it, and will not be enforcing it if it is ratified. These actions make about as much sense as taking down the Dept of Agriculture website in protest of ACTA.

Anonymous is just a bunch of skiddies. That FTC site was all they had the skill to do.

I'm sure they have a sense that sending a letter to the FTC or standing outside their office won't do anything so they are acting out in the best way that they know with something they think will get their best attention and the media's attention. I mean if you have a complaint about something you're going to have to do a little bit more then say please sir can you stop. Also in this day of age you can't just say excuse me anymore for someone to listen you're going to have to shout and your going to have to act out.

If they keep doing this for every perceived slight, though, it'll stop getting them media attention pretty quick. The only place I saw this story was ars.

While I feel there is a right to protest, what good does it do to take down a site used by citizens to conduct legitimate business?

I'm sure they have a sense that sending a letter to the FTC or standing outside their office won't do anything so they are acting out in the best way that they know with something they think will get their best attention and the media's attention. I mean if you have a complaint about something you're going to have to do a little bit more then say please sir can you stop. Also in this day of age you can't just say excuse me anymore for someone to listen you're going to have to shout and your going to have to act out.

Right...and you think the FTC, or any other government agency is going to give in to Anonymous's demands?.No, that would just be an incredible sign of weakness.They might hunt them down like rats though.

Regardless of how you feel about them, you just have to admire their balls of steel.

Bullies (whether real or cyber) are not worthy of admiration. If they are so damn tough, let them come out from behind their cloak of anonymity and do the same thing. Until then their balls are no more than papier-mâché.

Regardless of how you feel about them, you just have to admire their balls of steel.

Bullies (whether real or cyber) are not worthy of admiration. If they are so damn tough, let them come out from behind their cloak of anonymity and do the same thing. Until then their balls are no more than papier-mâché.

Yes, I agree. It would be really impressive to see them DDOS a person IRL you know?

While I feel there is a right to protest, what good does it do to take down a site used by citizens to conduct legitimate business?

I'm sure they have a sense that sending a letter to the FTC or standing outside their office won't do anything so they are acting out in the best way that they know with something they think will get their best attention and the media's attention. I mean if you have a complaint about something you're going to have to do a little bit more then say please sir can you stop. Also in this day of age you can't just say excuse me anymore for someone to listen you're going to have to shout and your going to have to act out.

Right...and you think the FTC, or any other government agency is going to give in to Anonymous's demands?.No, that would just be an incredible sign of weakness.They might hunt them down like rats though.

No i don't think so, its just an analysis, but if the government was doing something that you didn't agree with would you endlessly send letters or do something more drastic? Or are you implying that you would just do nothing? The fact they are trying to do more will get they more attention then doing nothing or slightly more then nothing.

Every pointless attack they make is going to hurt their cause. If they are perceived as just lashing out at everyone for no reason, people will just start rolling their eyes or ignore the story all together. Protest in person or write letters to congress (yes they do read them) don't just sit behind a computer and download a selfworking program.

As for the people saying they may not know any other way to get their point across so at least they are doing something, what a ridiculous concept. That really makes them no better than a 4 year old who breaks his favorite toy because he got sent to his room. It's pointless and harms them more than helps.

What can you expect from leaderless organization. Some causes make sense some just don't and seem more like terrorism. Its good to have some one to help keep the balance when the governmental powers get abused often, but this is a contradiction to that cause.

By that logic, you're firing a blog-bullet while stroking your e-peen.

Arthmoor wrote:

Anonymous is just a bunch of skiddies. That FTC site was all they had the skill to do.

Those noobs! Hopefully they'll build their resume to include a list of successful take-downs, intrusions, exposures and activist aid. One day.....

roken wrote:

Right...and you think the FTC, or any other government agency is going to give in to Anonymous's demands?.No, that would just be an incredible sign of weakness.They might hunt them down like rats though.

How's that worked out so far? Hmmm?2006 called. They want their verbatim threats back...

fgoodwin wrote:

afanen01 wrote:

Regardless of how you feel about them, you just have to admire their balls of steel.

Bullies (whether real or cyber) are not worthy of admiration. If they are so damn tough, let them come out from behind their cloak of anonymity and do the same thing. Until then their balls are no more than papier-mâché.

You're obviously confused as to who the bullies are, and attempting to equate the tool of anonymity with cowardice is about as effective and mature as a double-dog-dare. I don't think you should attempt to discuss what other people's balls are made of until your own drop.

It's not like Anonymous is an actual organization with goals or something like that.

As the name kind of implies, anyone on the Internet can be "Anonymous". This obviously includes everyone from angsty teens with a power-rush, to, I believe, experts with a serious skill set and some sort of ideology.

And all government sites are going to be a target because "ZOMG! I haxxored the government".

Sean Gallagher / Sean is Ars Technica's IT Editor. A former Navy officer, systems administrator, and network systems integrator with 20 years of IT journalism experience, he lives and works in Baltimore, Maryland.